Let's see... the Presidents that have used military action over the years WITHOUT prior Congressional approval. Harry Truman in Korea, G HW Bush in Iraq (they did 5 MONTHS later), and Clinton in Serbia - which was never approved or authed by Congress OR the U.N.

Why are they so pissed about Libya? Because they weren't ASKED to approve it (not that they have to even be asked, but with the black man they expected it), so it pissed them off - even tough it's happened before with the white guys.

Truly, if you don't realize the media (tv and radio) is playing you by now... then you should feel very ashamed of yourself, I feel ashamed that so many Americans buy into this bullshit, it makes us all look stupid!

Put the tit down people, it's bad milk.

No, your idiot interpretation of history is funny.
You got a link to Reagan saying his tax cuts were a mistake?

So far, our video game wars have not led to retaliation. Inevitably revenge will be a nuclear bomb going off in NY or DC. It wont come off an ICBM (which we spend 100 billion for missile defense that doesnt work) it will come in a ryder truck.

Given the way we have treated pakistan, i wouldnt be suprised at all if a pakistan nuke drives america over the cliff. The bomb will have "osamas revenge" written on the side.

Tax cuts? That should have been, his deficit... Caused by his over spending and retarded tax cut that had to be removed. And yeah, he regretted it without question, look it up ya lazy fuck.


Back to history... What part confused you?

That during the 50-60's tax rates where double what they are today? You can look it up in seconds.

That we have some of the lowest taxes today than in the last 100 years? Again, you can look it up.

Or that a Corporation wasn't anything like today? That the State did authorize them, they were for the benefit of the people and not for the benefit of profit?

This is ALL information that can be looked up in seconds. Only a complete buffoon would argue it, oh wait.....

translation: Reagan never said it. I'm on another drunken rant.

Well said.

Where do you cut and paste this stuff from? You've already demonstrated you don't have the slightest clue about politics or our economy countless times.

I understand now why you don't debate, argue, or do anything to prove yourself or even disprove someone else... I get it, you're an idiot. Hell we all get it.

Ok, you're on another drunken rant? Maybe you should get help?

they care just about their fat pockets!

Still making up shit and passing it off as fact? We all get that you're an idiot as well but that's neither here nor there. I learned to not take one side over the other and completely rationalize like you're doing. Screw the left and the right.

Morning #2.

Posting facts does not take a side, I know you people hate facts, but they do not define a side, they define the truth.

If you wish to actually argue what I said, then have it... otherwise you're just running your cock holster as usual #2.

It's amusing that you can't separate facts from facts according to you but I think we're all amused when you try to argue politics, or anything logical really. Keep at it.

Wow, great debate #2, that really showed me up, ouch... it was an epic defeat. :1orglaugh

If you think that the Republicans got us into this mess congratulations you are a certified MORON!

If you think that the Democrats got us into this mess congratulations you are a certified MORON!

If you think the voters and BOTH parties got us into this mess go to the head of the class...now the questions is what are YOU going to do to fix it?

Vote Republican? Vote Democrat? yes...do that and get more of the same...pull your heads out of your asses, it's time for REAL change, vote Libertarian.

Thats the backbone of the Republican business model.

Its time for a very bloody revolution...If anyone thinks voting gets us anywhere...then I have a bridge I want to sell ya...

How's that working out for the Democrats keeping the soldiers there?:thumbsup


Also, if you're insanely insecure and as a result, think everyone else is a "sheep" because they vote left or right and you can sleep better at night pretending you're enlightened, and think the 3rd party is going to use magic to fix things, vote libertarian!!

Sadly, libertarianism can't work, because it depends on an educated populace with roughly equal access to accurate information.

Libertarians can't govern.

But, arguably a libertarian vote is better than a vote for the two-parties-which-are-actually-one.

Because it crashes the system faster.

But leaves unanswered the question of what kind of government model can actually work.

Not that we have any choice. The corpocracy conquered us, is already in charge, and can't be stopped.

In a sense, our great hope is that the parasite of corpocracy will attack the east, leaving the near-dead body of the US free enough to recover.

Our best chance is to learn how to survive inside the dying body of the american century.

Let's skip straight to a Technocracy.

Technocracy is a form of government in which engineers, scientists, health professionals and other technical experts are in control of decision making in their respective fields.

Worth considering. Certainbly worth modeling it out, and thinking about the ways it could work and teh ways it would fail.

Last night I found myself working out in my imagination the implications of having a scientist as president, rather than a lawyer or professional politician.

The problem of course is that while our current rulers are in power a technocracy is impossible by definition.

The interesting question is, how do you take advantage of the convulsion that is coming, our own ineviitable "american spring of rage", to try something new.

It wont be easy. Many will die. The corpocracy expects riots and is very prepared to kill and torture as many americans as needed to stay in power.

Anyone espouses higher income tax rates is either a masochist or a loser who plans on remaining a loser.

What happens here tho is likely to be different from the mass demonstrations of the arab spring of rage.

Our society is structured differently. The middle class is suburban not urban - and all the corpocracy has to do is control the price of gasoline to restrict travel.

It's interesting to think about what an american spring of rage would look like.

I suspect it will be more like a "spring of meh" - apathy and helplessness and FUD escalated to the level of a slow moving general "productivity strike" and consumer strike.

Hitting the corpocracy where it's weak, it's soft consumer economy underbelly. Starving it so it HAS to depend on asian consumers for power.

The great tragedy of our time is that obama turned out to be a corporatist right/centrist. I say turned out, but it was clear during the campaign that he was a right/centrist.

The brief oppurtunity we had to change course was stolen from us by the corpocracy's control of the dems.

Which was of course the corpocracy's plan all along. When you are a collection of immortal super-persons and semi-immortal plutocrat families, you have the kind of perspective and training and control over information that make sit easy to insert a ringer like obama into the political machine.

It's tragic to see right/centrist corporatist neo-liberal policies be handed out by the dems as if they were actually good for the people.

While the infrastructure rots, and nothing gets done, and resources we need to change course are sold off.

Have you not clued in yet that he's nothing more than a troll that posts shit to stir people up.. He never posts facts or backs up anything he says. He's just a one liner keyboard warrior.

The "spring of rage" will look much like it did during the Vietnam and Civil Rights era. Millions of people taking to the streets...virtually every major city and University burning...virtual anarchy.

You have greater faith in the courage of the american people than I. I suppose I should be humbled.

We shall see.

Such mass riots are fairly easily channeled and suppressed tho, by a police and military with corpocrat backing and modern crowd control and information control technology.

The way that crowd protests have been managed and made meaningless this past decade, as example the protests against these "wars of choice" and free trade, does not bode well for protest and crowd resistance in america.

Tho, one can make the argument that the people have access to their own technology.

What I expect to happen is this - protests will start, then the corpocrats will trigger off and fund counterprotests by the tea party or whomever they chose as their brownshirts, setting groups against each other like dogs in a pit.

Then the mercenaries move in with advanced crowd control technology "to restore order", backed by the police and military.

It's a tested formula.

You have all of these ideas and conspiracies about "the man" but I honestly don't understand where you're going with this. What are you going to replaced the corporations with? Other morons who just happen to have less money? What is this ideal utopia you speak of? Who you replace is going to do the same thing any other lead plans on doing and that's getting into the pockets of the rich and letting them control what they need. This is capitalism and while it has its flaws, I challenge you to find something better, realistically speaking of course.

It's just the same thing from the majority of people on the net. "Two sides of the same coin", "get rid of the greedy corporations". And replace them with what? I'd rather have rich people run our country than poor ignorant ones, wouldn't you?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_883827.html
In recent weeks, Congressional support has been forming around the idea of another "repatriation tax holiday," reports the Wall Street Journal. The would mean corporations doing business overseas would be permitted to pay only 5.25 percent tax on earnings brought back to the United States for a temporary time period, as opposed to 35 percent corporate tax rate on domestic profits.

Proponents of the proposal claim a tax holiday will bring much needed capital back to the U.S. economy for investment. But not everyone agrees.

Following the conclusion of the last tax holiday, in 2004, corporations actually increased the rate at which they moved investments out of the U.S, according to a study by the Center of Budget and Policy Priorities. The decision to move overseas, the study claims, was at least partly in anticipation of there being another tax holiday.

That's because it was only temporary.
What our govt. calls a "Tax Holiday" is business as usual in some countries. And since taxes are usually the biggest expense a company has (It's definitely my NUMBER ONE cost to do business)...it only makes sense to move somewhere else.

Hell, even The Beatles and The Stones left England because of the insane tax rates. Of course companies in 2011 are going to do the same.

And does anyone ever ask this: If a "tax holiday" brings in more money to the U.S. , then why don't we make it PERMANENT and bring all the companies in the world running to the U.S.?
Hell, they all want to be here anyway. But when you combine high labor costs AND the govt. trying to take most of your money...they just won't come here.

Both parties spend too much, but the Dems waste much more money on unconstitutional and unproductive social programs.

Reagan spent heavily on the military to bankrupt the Soviet Union, and it succeeded. Give the man a standing ovation.

Yea, I was wishing the same thing, that Obama would be further to the left.

:1orglaugh

:upsidedow

:Oh crap

:helpme

Hahaha. Still no link, punk? :1orglaugh

They are not any easier to channel today than they were during the Vietnam and Civil Rights era. Tens of millions took to the streets and set on fire virtually every major city and University. There were major battles between those that were protesting and those that were against the protesters and between the Police/National Guard and the protesters. There was large numbers of people injured/killed and arrested. It was a time of virtual anarchy in the country that went on for years and did not stop until the Government pulled all troops out of Vietnam in '73 and Civil Rights were granted.

Any and every protest since that era has been minute in comparison and have been easily controllable.

Said the weekend warrior pretending to be in my business.:1orglaugh

One of the risks of using rhetoric the way you do is that it leads to a tendency to distort ALL information, not just the political information you think you are attacking.

In this case, for instance, you attribute to me talk of conspiracies and uptopias, when I almost never use the first term and never use the second.

However, lets leave aside the information distortion, and look at the questions.

You say that whatever replaces the current system will also tend to be corrupted. Obviously this is true.

But, we can at least fix the gaping loophole that allows the corpocracy to rule - by instituting a strong policy of electoral reform and strict public funding of candidates.

We have to ban the legalized bribery of private funding of candidates, and by doing so, make politicians fear the voter more than the funder.

I'd like to take that a step further and institute laws controlling the revolving door between political office and government employment and corporate employment, but let's take that one step at a time.

Electoral reform alone might be enough to solve many of the problems of our era - the political problems at least, most of which are based in our institutionalized system of legal bribes in exchange for favors, of deep and endemic corruption of public service.

You set up a false choice between rule by the rich and rule by the ignorant poor - altho, I'd liek to point out that in the tea party phenomena we see an exampel of the fusion of rule by the rich AND rule by the ignorant poor.

However, I don't see the real problem as being one of rich versus poor - the real thing that is happening is the competition between managed and unmanaged economies (technically between more managed and less amanged economies).

And the managed economies are winning - the corporations are moving production to the areas of the planet ruled by managed economies, and america's less-managed economy is being abandoned in favor of more-managed economies.

So, your false choice is also an incorrect model - this isn't about wether the rich rule or the poor rule - it's about managing the economy.

True.

I hope you are right. I hope americans are that brave.

I also hope more americans arm themselves.

"You" in the general sense, not you personally. The people on this forum.


Do you think most voters are brainless or informed? If it's the former, I'm not sure how this is going to change anything, other than idiotic candidates. If it's the latter, well then I praise you for your optimism.

This goes back to my question. What if the majority of voters are morons? Should the politicians fear those morons?

Now THAT is interesting.


It wasn't a false choice because I'm not sure there is a middle ground. We have to come to terms that most people on this earth are NOT intelligent so I'm not sure what choices there are.

This is a whole new discussion in itself. I think we both recognize the pros and cons of both types of economies, yet I still lean towards the unmanaged.

And who do you propose manages the economy? The 'informed" voter or politician who at one point or another is going to sacrifice his morals?